OWA-NAS/new label

[jburlowski]

I must be the only person who likes the new bottle design.

The juice inside is excellent. I just hope with the lack of an age statement witch makes it easier to allow quality to slip, it stays that way.

I'm also with Brad on both points....:bigeyes:

[Special Reserve]

Brad,

You better be seated, I agree with both you and John on all the points about the NAS OWA.

Will

[Josh]

This elitist likes it too.

[Halifax]

We still have a fair amount of the old bottles with age statement on the shelves here in NC. Humm... will this be a future dusty that we see in pics of here in years to come?

[BourbonJoe]

We still have a fair amount of the old bottles with age statement on the shelves here in NC. Humm... will this be a future dusty that we see in pics of here in years to come?

Yes, most likely, especially if the taste of the NAS heads south.

Joe :usflag:

[onmytrack]

I like what is being posted about the "new" OWA so I picked up a bottle. I hope it is as good as the "old" stuff. Can't really lose on this, it was only $17.49. Last one they had. I'll look for more.

Jim

[PaulO]

My own experience has been that all the newer bottles have been as good as the earlier label. As a matter of fact I recently passed up some old label OWA because I was looking for other stuff, and already had some of the new OWA at home. I like to think and hope BT won't lower the quality of one of my favorite brands. I think if they ever did, this site would light up like a Christmas tree.

[silverfish]

The latest issue of Malt Advocate (Fall 2010) has piece titled

TEN Great American whiskeys you may not know about (& why).

OWA 7 yr/107 proof is listed but the image is the new NAS

bottle. Either way, nice to see it included!

[Josh]

The latest issue of Malt Advocate (Fall 2010) has piece titled

TEN Great American whiskeys you may not know about (& why).

OWA 7 yr/107 proof is listed but the image is the new NAS

bottle. Either way, nice to see it included!

[Uilliam Uallas]

There are a lot of BT apologists on this thread. I dont think anyone who enjoys Weller Antique would be defending a company that is in the process of gutting this fine old whiskey. Their comment that there was not enough room on the label for "Aged 7 Years" is insulting and certainly not the true reason for removing it.

[dmarkle]

I'd just like to say to the conspiracy theorists that I saw a handle of this in the store next to the 750s, and *it* still has the old label on it -- then again, maybe it is an old bottling...

[jburlowski]

There are a lot of BT apologists on this thread. I dont think anyone who enjoys Weller Antique would be defending a company that is in the process of gutting this fine old whiskey. ..

[Special Reserve]

Given the choice between the "Aged Naturally 7 years in Wood" OWA and the NAS OWA I'd choose the NAS OWA. I have that choice. Nothing wrong with either.

[Uilliam Uallas]

Miffed is accurate. If Jack Daniels changed their bottle after a century and a half, or so, to a perfume bottle, could you imagine their customers praising their pretty new bottle of Jack. I couldn't either. BT deserves nothing but criticism over this.

[DeanSheen]

Given the choice between the "Aged Naturally 7 years in Wood" OWA and the NAS OWA I'd choose the NAS OWA. I have that choice. Nothing wrong with either.

Ditto. The dusties mean nothing to me because I prefer the taste of the new juice and I hope that the current quality continues.

I'm also not feeling nostalgic over packaging it's the contents that matter.

[callmeox]

Miffed is accurate. If Jack Daniels changed their bottle after a century and a half, or so, to a perfume bottle, could you imagine their customers praising their pretty new bottle of Jack. I couldn't either. BT deserves nothing but criticism over this.

Are you really using Jack as an example of maintaining a historic brand?

If their customers didn't mind buying more water and less whiskey after multiple proof reductions, I doubt that a bottle change would bother them .

B-F would just issue a press release "confirming" that the change is what their customers wanted.

[silverfish]

Are you really using Jack as an example of maintaining a historic brand?

If their customers didn't mind buying more water and less whiskey after multiple proof reductions, I doubt that a bottle change would bother them .

I disagree. I suspect that a change to the iconic JD bottle would probably

upset fans of the brand more so than the reduction in proof, unless it was

an improved design as in Gentleman Jack but even then I'm not so sure...

That said, the old OWA label had a certain rustic charm but having had both

old/new juice, the bottle redesign doesn't really bother me so much.

[callmeox]

I disagree. I suspect that a change to the iconic JD bottle would probably

upset fans of the brand more so than the reduction in proof, unless it was

an improved design as in Gentleman Jack but even then I'm not so sure...

That said, the old OWA label had a certain rustic charm but having had both

old/new juice, the bottle redesign doesn't really bother me so much.

Style over substance?

I'm a sheep. Fleece me!

[cowdery]

"I hate it when something I like changes" is a perfectly normal reaction. I remember a dean from my old college telling me that most alums want the campus to remain exactly the way it was during their student years. Companies that change products or reposition brands have to take into consideration the resistance many, perhaps most, people have to change. The gamble is that the changes will attract enough new customers to more than offset the old customers they alienate. Sometimes companies guess wrong. I hate to see those fairly normal reactions degenerate into bitterness and corporate-bashing, but there it is.

As American whiskey has grown in popularity and past supply gluts have vanished, replaced by supply tightness, many companies have dropped age statements, especially from inexpensive brands. If you think age statements are important, buy more Beam products, because they put age statements on everything, even their four-year-old Jim Beam white label. (Though not their semi-independent Maker's Mark brand.)

No American whiskey producer pays closer attention to the enthusiast community than Buffalo Trace. I'm sure they have heard the age statement preferences of OWA fans loud and clear.

[ILLfarmboy]

Given the choice between the "Aged Naturally 7 years in Wood" OWA and the NAS OWA I'd choose the NAS OWA. I have that choice. Nothing wrong with either.

Hmmmm. It Depends. If the age stated bottle if from a more recent dumping and has an 08 or an 09, especialy an 08 on the bottom of the bottle I'll take the NAS bottle. But if the age stated bottles are dusties from 04 and earlier, I'll take them over the NAS.

Rustic charm wouldn't get me to buy the age stated version anymore than my like of the new bottle and label would get me to buy the NAS.

Miffed is accurate. If Jack Daniels changed their bottle after a century and a half, or so, to a perfume bottle, could you imagine their customers praising their pretty new bottle of Jack. I couldn't either. BT deserves nothing but criticism over this.

Dude, do you drink whiskey because the bottle looks cool? See my above comment.

What BT deserves is criticism for dropping the age statement. Moreover, enthusiasts need to watch this product like a hawk to make sure the juice in the bottle doesn't slip and to make a lot of noise if it does.

[p_elliott]

People keep posting about old/new juice OWA where are you guys getting this from. They have not changed OWA they changed the bottle and label and suddenly the whiskey taste different. No one has come out and said that Weller SR suddenly taste different but yet they both come from the same barrels and the same dump. This new juice thing is all in your head. It's the same OWA that it was before just a different bottle.

[DeanSheen]

People keep posting about old/new juice OWA where are you guys getting this from. They have not changed OWA they changed the bottle and label and suddenly the whiskey taste different. No one has come out and said that Weller SR suddenly taste different but yet they both come from the same barrels and the same dump. This new juice thing is all in your head. It's the same OWA that it was before just a different bottle.

It comes from me buying about 5 bottles of 7yr and 8 or so of NAS. All of the NAS have been good but not all the 7yr have been.

It's a good point on the SR but I really dont see much talk about that bottling on here. I don't buy it so I cannot attest to old SR vs. New Bottle SR.

[Uilliam Uallas]

Making bourbon is a for profit business for BT and most others. The Colonel is right that they have made these changes to increase profits. Its their right. A cheaper bottle from another line, a cheaper label, and you could reasonably assume cheaper booze on the way. I dont much like their new business model and I would rather pay a little extra to keep it the same as before. In my mind OWA was a special whiskey. Smoother than many 80 proofs, a wheater with unique flavors, and a fine looking bottle to boot.

In response to the comments from the neo-connie waterboard boy,

"Dude, do you drink whiskey because the bottle looks cool?"

I would just say that some things are fine left unchanged. Weller Antique was one of them.

[Doggerlander]

This is a fascinating thread that seems to have come back to life. I tried the OWA in the new bottle and was very impressed. I bought some 7 yr label OWA, but now I think I'll go out and stock up on the new label since the quality might be up (based on earlier posts). I think I'll pick up some Weller 12 yr also with the hope that some Centennial juice is winding up there.

I'm not worried about the quality slipping in NAS OWA as long as SR has the 7 yr statement based on the post that points out the relationship between SR and OWA. I like BT products. It could be that this was just a marketing decision to emphasize 107 proof over age since it already has the word "antique" in the name. I always thought it was funny that the antique was the same age as SR.

[jburlowski]

I suspect BT has less aged wheated stock then they would like. There have been recent shortages of Weller 12. BT seems to be emphasing that brand and I'm betting that they are positioning themselves to have more Weller 12 available down the road.

At a minimum, they probably want to have the flexibility to put younger juice in OWA / WSR if needed. (Do they really need to have both of those expressions?)

Maybe the wheated bourbon that has been made at Tom Moore / Barton will play in this somehow......